Page:Pratt - The history of music (1907).djvu/638

 the pedagogue Czerny: in 1859 from the theorist Lobe; in 1860-1 from the violinist Spohr; in 1865 from the theorist Marx; and in 1870 from both Löwe and Berlioz.

Dictionaries of varying size and value were put forth in 1835 by August Gathy of Hamburg (d. 1858); in 1835-8 by Gustav Schilling of Stuttgart (d. 1881); in 1844 by Marie and Léon Escudier of Paris (d. 1880, '81); in 1849 by Ferdinand Simon Gassner of Darmstadt (d. 1851); in 1856-61 by Eduard Bernsdorf of Leipsic (d. 1901); and in 1865 by Arrey von Dommer of Hamburg (d. 1905). Much more important than any of these was the great work of Fétis in 1835-44 (2d ed., 1860-5).

Here may be added some of the many periodicals founded during the period, such as in 1824-48 Gottfried Weber's Cäcilia, from 1827 Fétis' Revue musicale, later merged in the Revue et gazette musicale, from 1834 Schumann's epoch-making Neue Zeitschrift fur Musik, from 1835 the Paris Ménestrel and the London Musical World, from 1843 the important Signale für die musikalische Welt, from 1844 the London Musical Times, from 1845 the Milan Gazzetta musicale, from 1847 the Neue Berliner Musikzeitung, from 1851 the Berlin Echo and the Vienna Monatsschrift für Theater und Musik, from 1860 L'art musicale, from 1862 the London Musical Standard, and from 1869 Eitner's Monatshefte fur Musikgeschichte.

228. Theorists and Critics.—The distinctively modern views of harmony and counterpoint began to take shape only from about 1840. They arose from two sources. The more speculative theorists felt that current definitions, classifications and rules should be simplified and to some extent restated. And the more radical composers, like Wagner and many others, were instinctively expanding procedure in all directions so vigorously that they were making the accepted authorities obsolete. In harmony, the most striking advance was represented by the Leipsic master Hauptmann, whose analysis of chords in relation to tonality and to the antithesis between major and minor marked an epoch. In counterpoint, there was no marked change in formal theory until the next period, though practice was departing widely from the usual standards. Naturally, the vast increase of institutions for formal musical education brought into notice many thoughtful teachers of musical science and structure, who embodied their methods in various text-books, often of considerable magnitude. Toward the end of the period attempts were made to reconstruct harmonic thought upon a chromatic basis, but these were principally useful in calling attention to infelicities of detail in the usual doctrines of chromatic tones and the transformation of chords.